Why does it seem like you are in denial of Spain's alleged Near Eastern/Levantine admixture? Not all peoples are mixed; obviously. I do not mean to say all Andalusians have this admixture; just the percentage of this admixture is extremely common in the South especially among Andalusians. And in another thread that Sile posted; one Catalonian man had haplogroup Y-DNA R2. How did it get there? The only explanation is that it was brought there by non-Europeans. Because R2 is not European in origin; and is most common around the Indian Subcontinent as well as the Middle East.
There are also small samples of Y-DNA H in Andalusians which suggests that some men in Andalusia may have had a male Roma ancestor.
I would say; in all likelihood, since you're Catalan and from the North of Iberia...The chances of you having a Phoenician/Moorish/Jewish/Roma/whatever ancestor; would be very low. You seem to be very insecure of Spaniards having non-European mixture though, for some odd reason. But you are Y-DNA R1b and mtdna H1; so the chances of you as a Catalan having non-European admixture would be very low. (In contrast to someone who lives in the region of Andalusia)
I am not saying that it is true that they are mixed with Arabic people; but it is still a mystery to me how haplogroups such as J1, J2, Q1b and even R2 or H arrived on the Iberian peninsula. They obviously did not come from Celts or Romans. So who brought them there? Even if there is some mixture; it does not mean all Andalusians share this admixture, and many of them may be as non-mixed as Northern Iberians.
But, I have observed Andalusians and Portuguese people and I can say they do not resemble the Basque people (or other Northern Iberians) at all. And many of them do appear to have non-European features. Their hair color and skin color is often darker than other Europeans; and they look like they picked up Near Eastern genetics. A lot of Andalusians I've noticed; look like Europeans mixed with Lebanese or Syrians. (not in a literal sense; just an analogy.) Most of them have dark black hair, the majority of it is straight while there are a few with curly hair. Sometimes there is Blondism but it is rare.
It doesn't appear that you have read the genetics papers of the last five or so years, or if you
have read them perhaps it is that you haven't fully absorbed the implications of these papers for an understanding of the peopling of Europe.
ALL Europeans have Near Eastern/Levantine admixture; the only question is how much and when did it arrive. West Eurasia forms a genetic continuum. You are aware, I take it, that many of the earliest inhabitants of Europe came via the Near East and the Caucasus?
Even should we move forward a bit in history, let's look at the Neolithic advance. Are you aware that agriculture was "invented" in the Near East? Do you know that most Europeans can be modeled as a mixture of three ancient populations, one of which is correlated with the Near East? Have you ever heard the term EEF? If you've sent a sample in to FTDNA or 23andme and then run your data through a calculator at gedmatch, you can get an EEF number for yourself. If you're part French and part English that number should be around 50%, and probably 80% of that is "Near Eastern". It's more complicated than this, but to put it simply it stems from people from the border of the coastal Levant near northern Syria and the southeastern portion of Turkey.
Let's now look at your assertions about yDna. First of all, you cannot draw any grand conclusions from such poorly defined yDna lineage information. You need a lot more resolution than that. I don't have the time to address all the subclades found in the study and their probable sources in terms of migrations into Europe . Suffice it to say that "H" yDna has been found in very ancient contexts in Europe. Only a very specific yDna "H" has any connection to the Roma. E-V13 has been found in a Neolithic European context, and the sub-clade of that which is most frequent in Europe today probably expanded from Greece during the Bronze Age. E-M81 is definitely a Berber lineage, but while some of it probably arrived in Spain and Sicily during the Moorish domination, in the case of Spain some of it may be Neolithic in origin. In terms of J2a you need very specific subclade information. J2a has been found in a Bronze Age Indo-European warrior in central Europe. We don't know yet J2a's precise migration path into Europe or its timing, but the vast majority of it is either Neolithic or Bronze Age in origin. For J1 there are also different subclades. Some came during the Neolithic, others came later. R2 is not European? Is the C of Mesolithic hunter gatherers European? How about the N found in Uralic speaking peoples? Let's look at the "Q" lineages. There is Q in the eastern European hunter gatherers. Or are those acceptably European because their spread is more "northern" in terms of spread?
As for R1b, the ancient R1b Yamnaya samples from whom (or from closely related peoples) the R1b in Europe stems were half "Armenian like". Last time I checked an atlas, Armenia was in the Near East. R1a is associated with Corded Ware, which can be modeled as 75% Yamnaya, and then there was admixture with Middle Neolithic people. For descendents of R1b and R1a Indo-Europeans in Europe to somehow see "Near Eastern" ancestry as inferior is bizarre to me to say the least.
There is no simple correlation, in my opinion, between yDna lineages and "ethnic" composition even on a macro level, much less on an individual level where generations of mixing may have diluted all traces of the origin and autosomal make up of an intrusive yDna lineage. All one needs to do to understand these concepts is to look at all those R1b people in Chad.
To turn to the Phoenicians specifically. I know that Zilloua has convinced many people that the Phoenicians were all J2a. I highly doubt that by their time any Levant population was exclusively one yDna lineage. However, let's assume that they were indeed all J2a. In order to tease out their specific contribution to any
particular European "ethnicity" you would need a sample of "Phoencian" yDna with subclade resolution. Even then you need an understanding that yDna contribution is going to be different than autosomal impact, particularly in the case of traders. Who knows, like traveling salesmen today, perhaps part of the appeal of long distance trade was specifically to get away from the "wife".
Personally, I don't find it probable they had a major impact anywhere, given the largely mercantile nature of their migrations. Were it otherwise, where is their specific J2a contribution to the area around Carthage, their most important stronghold?
Not that I have anything against the Phoenicians, mind. I have a lot more against the Indo-Europeans, believe it or not. My personal sympathies are always with the civilized core, not the Barbarians at the Gate.* The Phoenicians, at least, were descendents of the Canaanites, good followers of the Great Mother.
They were also great merchants, intrepid sea farers, and inventors of advanced navigation and the alphabet to boot. What's not to like? Is it that they were "Near Eastern"? It's not like this ancestry came from Mars. It's been in Europe since at least the Neolithic, and, who knows, maybe some of it was already in Greece in the Mesolithic. The Phoenicians were probably just a blend of EEF and ANE, two of the three components that shaped Europeans.
After years of listening to exponents of this point of view, it seems to me that the determining factor for some people as to whether a certain autosomal component is or is not "European" is when it arrived. For some, if it arrived after the Mesolithic it's not "European". Of course, for people like, say, the northwestern Europeans, that would mean a good chunk of their ancestry is not "European". Or, some move the goal post forward, and would say after the Bronze Age it's not European. Of course, if you examine that, it would include an awful lot of J2a that probably arrived in Europe in the Bronze Age. So perhaps they mean specifically if it arrived in the early Middle Ages with the Moorish invasions it's not "European"?That would let the Phoenician ancestry squeeze in just as the door closes, I suppose.
Or is it just that anything that came via a more northern corridor, like the Siberian ancestry in the northeast, is still "European" but via a southern corridor it's not?
I really don't understand the workings of this kind of mindset, and never have, so basically I just disregard this kind of world view as an abberation which has nothing to do with logic.
Bottom line, as I and others have said, "European" is a geographic, political, cultural, and to some extent (in terms of history)religious construct. The genetics form a cline. By that measure the Spanish are indeed European,
all of them, with many contributions to European civilization, far more than areas which you undoubtedly think are
more European because they are in northern Europe rather than in southern Europe.